Follow

Machine generated code that's possbly buggy and certain to be a rehashing of code someone already wrote before

vs

Machine generated analysis of ways that the code I wrote is buggy

... sigh, I guess I know which way the industry would prefer to jump, but I think I'll keep my current copilot, the ghc type checker.

· · Web · 5 · 9 · 15

@joeyh it's almost as though some people think that writing is the hardest part in programming

@joeyh Galaxy Brain: Don't let machines tell you how to code machines. You're the programmer, act like it!

@joeyh And a proof that with types, you can build a much more reliable "copilot": haskellwingman.dev/

@joeyh it feels like there’s roughly two ways of designing more powerful code autocompletion: either with type systems or by rehashing old code a scraper found in a repo somewhere.

… and for some reason, everyone’s chasing the latter?

I mean, stuff like wingman for haskell is enormously cool, but last I checked there was exactly one person working on it.

@joeyh Instead of thinking of what I want to write, I have to figure out what Copilot just wrote, and also fix its rookie mistakes like passing two parameters to a type constructor that only takes one parameter: youtube.com/watch?v=z2O5DspETf (video not mine)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Octodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!